Replies to This Discussion

"what are the services that should make a profit, which should be partially subsidized by charitable contributions, and which should be subsidized in total?"

"I have always believed that it is hard to get any organization (or any person) to succeed if you can’t define success."

Monica Oss raises these questions in relation to the governance of nonprofit health providers. I believe that these questions also are relevant to corporate training.

I wonder if corporate training functions are treated as if they were nonprofit organizations (i.e. providers of totally subsidized services?) Is there a practical and useful model for the corporate training function to be a real profit center?

As I try to understand what this means I believe that the relevant terms is "carve-out." This means rather than carving out a portion of the funding for "Behavioral Health" that the funding and "Behavioral Health" will be supported via a (larger and more competitive?) general fund?

Does the corporate training world function (benefit or suffer?) from a "carve-out" mentality?

As we explore the concept of "addiction" as being similar to counter-productive repetitive work related behaviors we have the opportunity to learn from how addictions are minimized. The opioid checklist provided by Netsmart http://www.ntst.com is:

Interoperability (how do we assure integration of new learning with previous and other current learning?)

Medication Management (how do we assure that the current learning is being assimilated?)

Clinical Decision Support (how do we prepare instructors/coaches to understand how this learner learns?)